| From: | "Clark C(dot) Evans" <clark(dot)evans(at)manhattanproject(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Clark C(dot) Evans" <clark(dot)evans(at)manhattanproject(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 1999-12-26 02:42:33 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.10.9912252130330.11219-100000@cauchy.clarkevans.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > > we become more popular?
> >
> > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
>
> I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
> working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins.
> Anything else?
How about an SQL*Net listener... this would make
PostgreSQL plug-n-play.
It could even be a proprietary product, thus allowing
VC's to fund it. It's a bit hard to justify changing
ODBC settings on 30+ apps on a few (hundred) thousand PC
workstations; some with hardcoded ODBC "ORA7.DLL" settings...
Why? Oracle is going to be shutting down Oracle 7 support
soon, forcing the upgrade to Oracle 8. This will leave
hundreds (thousands accross the industry?) of applications
stranded, and not alot of money to re-write/re-deploy/re-test
them. Just a thought... at every big company I've been with,
this has been a sore spot. It could also potentially
be a good consulting revenue stream for Marc's group.
Best,
Clark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ken | 1999-12-26 06:01:27 | Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-12-26 02:27:39 | Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL |